|
New York Times posted:In the 1950s, Leica rose to fame when it introduced the M-System camera, its first so-called range finder body with an interchangeable lens mount. Yeah, screw the screw mount!
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2013 00:20
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 08:39 |
|
|
One area where mirrorless kicks butt is shutter lag. DSLRs have longer shutter lag because they have a lot more parts flapping around before the camera records an image. I really noticed it when I went from a Canon DSLR to a NEX. The NEX had almost no lag so there was less anticipating the shot and more of taking the shot when it happened which was great for stuff like catching people jumping or whatever.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2013 02:29
|
|
|
HPL posted:One area where mirrorless kicks butt is shutter lag. DSLRs have longer shutter lag because they have a lot more parts flapping around before the camera records an image. I really noticed it when I went from a Canon DSLR to a NEX. The NEX had almost no lag so there was less anticipating the shot and more of taking the shot when it happened which was great for stuff like catching people jumping or whatever. That's not really true. Mirrorless bodies are getting better but generally speaking DSLRs have and continue to outperform it. For example the GF3 had a full-AF shot time of 0.312 seconds, a Canon 40D had a full-AF shot time of 0.128 seconds. The GF5 is 0.180 seconds, the OM-D is 0.175 seconds, a 7D is 0.131 seconds, a NEX-5N is 0.235 seconds (actually fairly bad). One reason the NEX achieves a pretty good prefocused time (compared to its full-AF cycle time) is that it has an electronic first-curtain shutter, which puts it ahead of even big boys like a 7D (22 ms vs 61 ms). That's not a feature shared in many other mirrorless bodies yet, and it tends to be an afterthought even on a DSLR (it's Canon's Silent Mode 1, with a prefocused lag of 202 ms on the 7D).
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2013 03:10
|
|
|
Blah blah blah numbers. I'm going by real world experience shooting events with both a 40D and 5N. If you're trying to get photos of jumps, head bangs, kicks or other such "wait for it... Wait for it..." type of moments, the electronic first shutter of the NEX is a huge advantage. It's the difference between trying to press the shutter button before something actually happens versus pressing it when it actually happens which is a big thing when there are no do-overs.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2013 03:32
|
|
|
If you're pre-focused, sure, but the point is for most people it's not realistic to count shutter lag without factoring in AF time.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2013 16:12
|
|
|
That and it's not applicable to all mirrorless cameras, which is what you suggested in your original post. So, blah blah blah, broad generalization from specific example, blah blah. NEX cameras with electronic first curtain shutter kick everything's butt in prefocused shutter delay, but other MILCs are pretty similar, and DSLRs tend to be faster if you include focus time. And shutter lag is a very measurable thing so it's not like adding numbers to the discussion is somehow unwarranted and less useful than your real world experience.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2013 16:38
|
|
|
Why not consider both pre-focused times and full AF times? Were those times from imaging-resource.com? How does that dude even calculate them? And doesn't AF speed change depending on speed of the lens' AF motor, making them not exactly comparable across brands?
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2013 17:17
|
|
|
I think that's the more important point—they both matter and how much they matter depends on what you're shooting and how you shoot it. I'm guessing those numbers are from imaging-resource and they usually use the kit lens for AF speed stuff. Ideally you'd be able to see the numbers with the lens you want to use, but even without it I think it's an OK basis for comparison.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2013 17:23
|
|
|
So far, I'm quite pleased with the XF 55-200. Focusing is pretty snappy and it's pretty sharp with decent bokeh. It's heavy for an XF lens, but I used to tote around a 5D2 with 70-200/2.8L so it's like a feather compared to that.   
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2013 22:04
|
|
|
RustedChrome posted:So far, I'm quite pleased with the XF 55-200. Focusing is pretty snappy and it's pretty sharp with decent bokeh. Those are some great photos for a telephoto lens of that price range, that's really impressive to me. Does the lack of a real grip on the X-Pro start bothering you with this lens on? Also, god drat this "Ken Burns" panning instead of true full-screen for Flickr is loving stupid.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2013 23:43
|
|
|
Costello Jello posted:Those are some great photos for a telephoto lens of that price range, that's really impressive to me. Does the lack of a real grip on the X-Pro start bothering you with this lens on? Thanks. Once, I learned to support the weight with my left hand cupping the lens, the system seemed perfectly balanced and I didn't need such a tight grip with my right hand. I have a leather half case on my X-Pro that provides a bit more to hang on to when I need it. And yes, Flickr: two steps forward, one step back.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2013 00:02
|
|
|
Wow those are some great shots. I foresee a 55-200 in my near future...
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2013 00:27
|
|
|
How does it handle bokeh with something tricky like tree leaves? I was set on getting a Tokina 90mm to play with, but that first picture looks really nice.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2013 01:17
|
|
|
RustedChrome posted:So far, I'm quite pleased with the XF 55-200. Focusing is pretty snappy and it's pretty sharp with decent bokeh.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2013 01:26
|
|
|
While we're on Fujichat, has anyone had some hands-on with the 60mm macro? I'm not sure if I want the 55-200 next or the macro. Obviously they don't cover the same roles but I can't buy both just yet.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2013 01:41
|
|
|
Yeah I think I will get the XF 55-200 next too. After playing with the Nikon 180/2.8 AIS and Canon 70-200mm f/4, I am convinced these FF top tier telephoto lens are too heavy and bulky for my recreational use. The 55-200mm pretty much is my only tele option at this point. For ultra wide options there are about a 3-4 good ones so I will wait till next year. I am getting rip of most of my non Fuji gears too. I am quite content with the thought that the until FF mirrorless body is affordable to me 4 years down the road, I will be rolling with Fuji gears only. The only thing I can't let go is a Nikon FM2n and a 28/2.8 AIS lens. I don't even shoot film anymore but I would like to pretend one day I will. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2013 01:47
|
|
|
Helicity posted:How does it handle bokeh with something tricky like tree leaves? I was set on getting a Tokina 90mm to play with, but that first picture looks really nice. In the second pic, the bird, you can get a little idea. I never saw any ugly bokeh from the lens so far. "[b posted:Bob Socko[/b]"]Lovely photo. Was this shot wide open? Is this more-or-less straight out of the camera, or did you need to do a meaningful amount of post processing? "[b posted:Digital Jesus[/b]"]While we're on Fujichat, has anyone had some hands-on with the 60mm macro? I'm not sure if I want the 55-200 next or the macro. Obviously they don't cover the same roles but I can't buy both just yet.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2013 02:06
|
|
|
What's the consensus on the Fuji 14mm? Thinking I need to be a little wider than I can get with the 18-55 and it's either the 14 or wait for the 10-24.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2013 03:09
|
|
|
So, I have zero experience with digital and don't want to spend much. I'm actually looking at that nex-3 with the broken screen on the sales thread for an cheap start into digital (Just waiting for a quote on the shipping actually). I plan on using exclusively the old manual lenses that I have right now and might acquire in the future. How is shooting on one of those cameras with an adapted/manual lenses? Is focusing just based on screen sharpness (think matte glass) or are there nifty cool digital tricks I don't know that exist that help with that?
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2013 04:24
|
|
|
Oh, you're gonna love focus peaking. Nex cameras will highlight the areas of highest contrast so you can tell, at a glance, what is or isn't in focus. You can also zoom in on the live-view image to fine tune your focus. It's really one of the killer features of the line.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2013 04:32
|
|
|
Bob Socko posted:Oh, you're gonna love focus peaking. Nex cameras will highlight the areas of highest contrast so you can tell, at a glance, what is or isn't in focus. You can also zoom in on the live-view image to fine tune your focus. It's really one of the killer features of the line. Focus Peaking is great, but I don't know how well it'll work with a cracked LCD, and you can't even get the external viewfinder on that particular version of the NEX3.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2013 04:39
|
|
|
You can get replacement screens for 30 or 40 bucks on ebay last time I checked though, if you're technically inclined.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2013 04:46
|
|
|
Mr. Despair posted:You can get replacement screens for 30 or 40 bucks on ebay last time I checked though, if you're technically inclined. Yep, that's the plan for the near future. Good to hear they are good for focusing, I'll just wait on the seller to give me the full price now them. Primo Itch fucked around with this message at 05:00 on Aug 12, 2013 |
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2013 04:57
|
|
|
Digital Jesus posted:While we're on Fujichat, has anyone had some hands-on with the 60mm macro? I'm not sure if I want the 55-200 next or the macro. Obviously they don't cover the same roles but I can't buy both just yet. The 60mm is chart-busting sharp and pretty small but the autofocus can be frustrating. There will likely be a glut of them as we start seeing more on the 56mm f/1.2. When the 56 was a 1.4 the mockup prototypes were pretty sizable so if size is a factor for you the 60mm might make you happy. Maybe rent one and see? Aargh posted:What's the consensus on the Fuji 14mm? Thinking I need to be a little wider than I can get with the 18-55 and it's either the 14 or wait for the 10-24. I think it's the XF flagship with the MF clutch and optically corrected distortion. It vignettes like crazy but it's worth a lot more than what they're asking for it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2013 06:52
|
|
|
ThisQuietReverie posted:The 60mm is chart-busting sharp and pretty small but the autofocus can be frustrating. There will likely be a glut of them as we start seeing more on the 56mm f/1.2. When the 56 was a 1.4 the mockup prototypes were pretty sizable so if size is a factor for you the 60mm might make you happy. Maybe rent one and see? Would that I could. Lens rental doesn't seem to be much of a thing in Australia, and the few sites that do it only really offer Canon/Nikon gear. I will no doubt want the 56 1.2 as well so I might just get the telephoto for now.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2013 09:19
|
|
|
Aargh posted:What's the consensus on the Fuji 14mm? Thinking I need to be a little wider than I can get with the 18-55 and it's either the 14 or wait for the 10-24. You might want to consider the Cosina-Voigtlander 15mm. Even with the adapter, it's the smallest lens I have at the moment. Incredibly sharp wide open (4.5) and you don't even really need to focus, so the auto focus isn't missed. Rent one for a weekend or something and see if you like it. I got mine used from KEH for half the price of the Fuji 14 and don't regret it at all. edit: I know it's all about IQ and not looks, but you can't say this isn't a sexy combo 
luchadornado fucked around with this message at 15:07 on Aug 12, 2013 |
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2013 12:22
|
|
|
Bob Socko posted:Oh, you're gonna love focus peaking. Nex cameras will highlight the areas of highest contrast so you can tell, at a glance, what is or isn't in focus. You can also zoom in on the live-view image to fine tune your focus. It's really one of the killer features of the line. It's not necessarily very accurate though, sometimes it's a choice between highlighting almost nothing and highlighting stuff that isn't in focus at all.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2013 14:40
|
|
|
Is there a good guide to shimming lens adapters? I got a cheapo chinese eBay Konica AR->E adapter for my NEX, and my Konica 40 1.8 focuses JUST past infinity. I guess I can shim it up with tinfoil but I have no idea how to determine how much I need or how to best go about measuring.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2013 20:56
|
|
|
Martytoof posted:Is there a good guide to shimming lens adapters? Doesn't it goes even more beyond infinity?
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2013 22:49
|
|
|
It does go beyond infinity which is why I want to shim it up which apparently fixes this problem. It goes so far beyond infinity that it sees back through time.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2013 22:54
|
|
|
Martytoof posted:It does go beyond infinity which is why I want to shim it up which apparently fixes this problem. Yeah but it's all blurry and out of focus anyways still.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2013 23:31
|
|
|
Martytoof posted:Is there a good guide to shimming lens adapters? Haven't tried it yet, but I found this while looking a few weeks ago: http://www.rokkorphile.com/2013/01/shimming-adapters-for-accurate-infinite.html
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2013 23:31
|
|
|
Looks decent. I'll give it a try this week 
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2013 00:10
|
|
|
Martytoof posted:Looks decent. I'll give it a try this week Please report back - I'd love to know how effective it was.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2013 00:39
|
|
|
Martytoof posted:It does go beyond infinity which is why I want to shim it up which apparently fixes this problem. Just be careful, you are dealing with forces you cannot understand.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2013 03:12
|
|
|
When this baby goes beyond 88mm, you're gonna see some serious poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2013 06:16
|
|
|
So MY GF wants to get into photography... I'm from Brazil and poo poo here is very expensive. A retailer has the Sony NEX F3 with the 18-55mm lens on a very huge sale for the princely sum of something around 300 dollars. Would that be a good beginner choice? Anything else (entry level DSLRs) is really 3-5 times more expensive at least. Are they 3-5 times better? Just a couple of names off the top of my head for you guys to get an idea about what I've been keeping my eye on lately: Nikon D7000 Canon EOS 5D (quite the expensive one) Am I wrong in understanding that the NEX F3 has a pretty kickass sensor (specially when you consider it's price) and one can easily and cheaply (compared to almost every other non-mirrorless cameras) buy, adapt and use other lenses with it? Are the manual settings good enough to allow for some serious learning and adjustments? I think that's the gist of it. Fellow goons, please do help me. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2013 00:41
|
|
|
Meanie posted:So MY GF wants to get into photography... The NEX-f3 is the current low end NEX camera, $300 bucks for one with the lens is an amazing deal. They go for more than that used here in the US still. The 5D is by far the oldest camera in that list, but is also the cheapest full frame camera you can probably fine. Probably overkill for a beginner, and definitely a bad choice if you want to shoot low light stuff (where either the nex or the nikon would out do it). The d7000 is also still a great camera, but it's much bigger and bulkier and probably doesn't have any better image quality than the nex. People complain about the nex a lot because it holds your hands a lot (I think my friends -c3 came with one of the function keys on the back set by default to "help"), but it's not going to really hurt you once you get used to it. It's also really easy to adapt lenses to the -f3, it's got focus peaking and all that. I'd go for it. Hell, if I saw a nex-f3 in the store here on clearance for 300 I'd probably buy it just to flip for a profit on amazon.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2013 01:31
|
|
|
A friend of mine wants to get a camera primarily for shooting in concerts, so moderate subject movement and possibly some photographer movement, both stills and videos. It looks like these mirrorless interchangeable lens systems are the middle of the road between point and shoots and a full DSLR, with a budget of $300-500 does this make sense or is she better off looking elsewhere? I'm seeing a used panasonic G1 with a 15-45mm lens for $250, would that be a good deal along with getting a 55-200 (or similar) lens for shooting far away things, or would this perform horribly in a high movement, likely lovely lighting concert setting?
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2013 04:30
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 08:39 |
|
|
Brut posted:A friend of mine wants to get a camera primarily for shooting in concerts, so moderate subject movement and possibly some photographer movement, both stills and videos. It looks like these mirrorless interchangeable lens systems are the middle of the road between point and shoots and a full DSLR, with a budget of $300-500 does this make sense or is she better off looking elsewhere? I'm seeing a used panasonic G1 with a 15-45mm lens for $250, would that be a good deal along with getting a 55-200 (or similar) lens for shooting far away things, or would this perform horribly in a high movement, likely lovely lighting concert setting? Concerts is very demanding to hardware, you might want to double the budget first or find a more budget friendly type of photography. And mirrorless systems don't really offer cheaper large sensor body or fast lens.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2013 04:57
|
|